How did Hernán Cortés and his conquistador’s, who were in now Mexico, have enough ammunition to fight the natives while staying for years 1519–1521
In: Other
Another detail is how the Spanish and Aztec weapons matched up.
Spanish cannons were something that the Aztecs were unprepared for. Walls have be built differently to resist cannon fire than pre-gunpowder siege equipment; they need to have a thick base and an outward slope that will disperse the impact. For anything else, a straight vertical wall will work fine, with a lot less effort…but a cannon shot to the lower wall will bring the whole thing down.
Spanish handheld guns were still quite primitive. Pre-measured cartridges hadn’t been invented yet, so each required the musketeer to manually load the powder, shot and wadding, measuring in the field. This means that the guns had a fire rate of only about one shot per minute. They were also inaccurate smooth bore weapons, meaning that they were only effective when fired in volleys. Most battles opened on a volley, then a few more as the enemy closed, but that was all. So we’re talking maybe five shots *per battle.*
The Spanish swords were top notch. Spain had an unusually pure vein of iron that made world-renown steel. Their armor was of similar quality. The result were weapons that pierced Aztec armor and cut their shields to ribbons.
On the other side, the standard Aztec armament was a basically a hatchet, with an edge formed of obsidian shards. They were razor sharp, and could kill a man easily…but not through steel armor. These weapons would literally shatter on Spanish mail and plate. They were also ineffective against Spanish cavalry, which they’d never had to defend from before.
Lastly, the Aztecs only had one domesticated animal (llamas). The Europeans had had several, and typically lived in the same buildings as their animals to conserve fuel during harsh European winters. This means that Europeans had built up immunity to a lot of diseases that the Aztecs had never encountered, and the Aztecs lack of their own close-kept livestock meant there were no equivalent diseases in the Americas.
Latest Answers